Posted: Tue May 28, 2002 9:16 am
I have been reading the posts here for a long time now.Ive only recently posted as I get little time.The purpose of this post is to offer my view of the Creamware platform as a music and sound production system.I hope this of interest to at least some of you and maybe restore the faith of a few.
Firstly who am I?If you Club or listen to "serious" dance music you will have heard my name and music.You will also have heard Remixes of mine.I have also been a programmer for "mainstream" artists.The only non commercial project I have been engaged in recently is creating a sound bank for John Bowen's fantastic Ambient synth,I will be repeating this for DarkStar too( these will become available to you all soon and have already been used in a number of releases).John has heard a small sample of the results i obtain from the platform and of my use of his synths and was very enthusiastic.This formed the basis of a future release which has already been "White labeled",and went down very well.As well as all my outboard I use 2 specially commissioned CW based systems one with 30 DSP and one with 45.I think I am more than qualified to give a professional view/appraisal of the Scope/Pulsar system or SFP as it is now called.Any views or comments I give are as a result of my own experience and much of what I say is a reflection of the fact that my computers are fully custom built and configured ,never have or will have any non music App and are not connected to the net.
I chose to have a creamware system as a result of seeing one in action during a remix job.I was amazed at the routing possibilities and the seamless integration with the ADAT machines I and many others use.The synths I felt were good,but the Modular stood out.I had used Reactor extensively(including 3rd party instruments)and felt that it had a fantastic list of modules and possibilities (better than CW Modular) but in use it sounded thin and weedy infact like a toy.The CW modular is able to compete with the only other serious modular contender.. the Nord.I later discovered John Bowens machines ( Ambient in particular),they are fully superior to ANY softsynths available.His Prophet shows up the short cuts taken with the NI Pro-52,which leads me to my next point...ALGORITHMS
Its been posted that this or that card are more powerful than the Sharc chips in terms of Mhz and Mflops,(my Sony desk is Sharc powered incidentally) and this is true.Its also argued that you need loads of DSP,that's also true ,but ive got loads so that point doesn't concern me.The CW boards are less powerful than some but where they totally out perform the opposition is the QUALITY of their ALGORITHMS.Give me sonic quality over unsupported Mhz any day.As an example a "friend" purchased an Oaysis based system and returned it in less than a week as he thought he was getting a similar thing to Scope.He came away with a Scope and now has added 2 SRB,even replacing 1 of his 2 ADATS with VDAT(which he swears by).I personally used 3 Akai 6000s I now have 1,the other two(replaced in the studio with the far superior STS5000 despite the odd gremlin) were sold and subsidised my SRBs.I did the same with my fully expanded Nord.When I get time to use VDAT one of my ADATs will go the same way.Now you can see the huge cost of my CW systems is not as high as you may have first assumed.When Cubase SX gives me the audio engine of Nuendo alongside Cubase sequencing and CW quality converters the smaller of our two Pro-Tools systems will be sold(if you want to complain about bugs.....PT is no better)The FX are not really highend although a couple of 3rd party verbs are cool and MasterVerb pro is pretty good.The Matering plugs Psy-Q and Optimaster get used all the time now and are first rate(and compare well with outboard TC).I must single out the Vocodiser for special mention,I have used both EMS and Senhieser vocoders and the Vocodiser is by far the best I have ever used.It is fantastic for vox,pads and loop/phrase/drum treatment.
Another criticism of the CW system is that it is too complicated.To anyone with REAL experience in a REAL studio, it is laid out well and is very simple and easy to master as it conforms to most studio conventions.This makes the mixers a pleasure to use.I do sympathise with those who do find it difficult.Some of the problems that even the pulsar "gurus" and "geeks" still seem have would not arise if there was a better understanding of studio workings.The traffic is 2 way though insofar as a non studio experienced CW owner would find the concepts in a studio easier to master than a purely VST guy.
I have taken the time to post here as I feel many people are worried about the future of the platform.I feel it is pretty secure.I've also been shown a few "works in progress" for the platform that are exiting.I could name a few other "known" players who use CW products(see this months Future Music article on Black Dog).Posters have also said that "Real Pros" dont visit these sites.WRONG.On here you tend NOT to get the tpypical VSTi site post of "I need a freeware Nord Lead emulator for my soundblaster" answered with " the Dash xxx is a perfect recreation but costs a staggering $25" or "I just sold my Pro Tools rig and my ADAT and my racks of Rolands and Waldorfs and replaced it all with FruityLoops and its much better,I've just finished an album on it"Talk about mass delusion by some or blatant bullshit by others.There are pro only sites that negate that problem.I have to laugh sometimes(even on here) when people claim to be "in the game" when its so obvious they're not,thats a different point though.
The CW system is a pro solution and as such deseves to be housed in a pro level computer.Most of the problems i have seen on here are due to bad configuration or being housed in multi-purpose machines.Shure the cards can be choosy but its all well documented.Digidesign is the same.The people I work with who have CW systems or single cards all have single purpose DAWs.A computer is NOT a DAW just because you tag on some music Software or god forbid,a bloody SB card.Ive even noticed a few questions which by thier nature indicate that cracked software is being used.Please dont jump on me if you think thats just affluent arrogance,im just giving a view from where i stand,which is with a hugely powerful,amazing sounding and almost flawless system.Any positive statements or opinions concerning instruments or plugs are as a result of more than a few releases/remixes from which I earn a nice living.Hope this provides food for thought and maybe a bit of reasurance for some.If anyone is interested I may be able to chip in a post relating to CW use in a real setting every couple of weeks.
PS Why use LSD when you can have DSP instesd
Firstly who am I?If you Club or listen to "serious" dance music you will have heard my name and music.You will also have heard Remixes of mine.I have also been a programmer for "mainstream" artists.The only non commercial project I have been engaged in recently is creating a sound bank for John Bowen's fantastic Ambient synth,I will be repeating this for DarkStar too( these will become available to you all soon and have already been used in a number of releases).John has heard a small sample of the results i obtain from the platform and of my use of his synths and was very enthusiastic.This formed the basis of a future release which has already been "White labeled",and went down very well.As well as all my outboard I use 2 specially commissioned CW based systems one with 30 DSP and one with 45.I think I am more than qualified to give a professional view/appraisal of the Scope/Pulsar system or SFP as it is now called.Any views or comments I give are as a result of my own experience and much of what I say is a reflection of the fact that my computers are fully custom built and configured ,never have or will have any non music App and are not connected to the net.
I chose to have a creamware system as a result of seeing one in action during a remix job.I was amazed at the routing possibilities and the seamless integration with the ADAT machines I and many others use.The synths I felt were good,but the Modular stood out.I had used Reactor extensively(including 3rd party instruments)and felt that it had a fantastic list of modules and possibilities (better than CW Modular) but in use it sounded thin and weedy infact like a toy.The CW modular is able to compete with the only other serious modular contender.. the Nord.I later discovered John Bowens machines ( Ambient in particular),they are fully superior to ANY softsynths available.His Prophet shows up the short cuts taken with the NI Pro-52,which leads me to my next point...ALGORITHMS
Its been posted that this or that card are more powerful than the Sharc chips in terms of Mhz and Mflops,(my Sony desk is Sharc powered incidentally) and this is true.Its also argued that you need loads of DSP,that's also true ,but ive got loads so that point doesn't concern me.The CW boards are less powerful than some but where they totally out perform the opposition is the QUALITY of their ALGORITHMS.Give me sonic quality over unsupported Mhz any day.As an example a "friend" purchased an Oaysis based system and returned it in less than a week as he thought he was getting a similar thing to Scope.He came away with a Scope and now has added 2 SRB,even replacing 1 of his 2 ADATS with VDAT(which he swears by).I personally used 3 Akai 6000s I now have 1,the other two(replaced in the studio with the far superior STS5000 despite the odd gremlin) were sold and subsidised my SRBs.I did the same with my fully expanded Nord.When I get time to use VDAT one of my ADATs will go the same way.Now you can see the huge cost of my CW systems is not as high as you may have first assumed.When Cubase SX gives me the audio engine of Nuendo alongside Cubase sequencing and CW quality converters the smaller of our two Pro-Tools systems will be sold(if you want to complain about bugs.....PT is no better)The FX are not really highend although a couple of 3rd party verbs are cool and MasterVerb pro is pretty good.The Matering plugs Psy-Q and Optimaster get used all the time now and are first rate(and compare well with outboard TC).I must single out the Vocodiser for special mention,I have used both EMS and Senhieser vocoders and the Vocodiser is by far the best I have ever used.It is fantastic for vox,pads and loop/phrase/drum treatment.
Another criticism of the CW system is that it is too complicated.To anyone with REAL experience in a REAL studio, it is laid out well and is very simple and easy to master as it conforms to most studio conventions.This makes the mixers a pleasure to use.I do sympathise with those who do find it difficult.Some of the problems that even the pulsar "gurus" and "geeks" still seem have would not arise if there was a better understanding of studio workings.The traffic is 2 way though insofar as a non studio experienced CW owner would find the concepts in a studio easier to master than a purely VST guy.
I have taken the time to post here as I feel many people are worried about the future of the platform.I feel it is pretty secure.I've also been shown a few "works in progress" for the platform that are exiting.I could name a few other "known" players who use CW products(see this months Future Music article on Black Dog).Posters have also said that "Real Pros" dont visit these sites.WRONG.On here you tend NOT to get the tpypical VSTi site post of "I need a freeware Nord Lead emulator for my soundblaster" answered with " the Dash xxx is a perfect recreation but costs a staggering $25" or "I just sold my Pro Tools rig and my ADAT and my racks of Rolands and Waldorfs and replaced it all with FruityLoops and its much better,I've just finished an album on it"Talk about mass delusion by some or blatant bullshit by others.There are pro only sites that negate that problem.I have to laugh sometimes(even on here) when people claim to be "in the game" when its so obvious they're not,thats a different point though.
The CW system is a pro solution and as such deseves to be housed in a pro level computer.Most of the problems i have seen on here are due to bad configuration or being housed in multi-purpose machines.Shure the cards can be choosy but its all well documented.Digidesign is the same.The people I work with who have CW systems or single cards all have single purpose DAWs.A computer is NOT a DAW just because you tag on some music Software or god forbid,a bloody SB card.Ive even noticed a few questions which by thier nature indicate that cracked software is being used.Please dont jump on me if you think thats just affluent arrogance,im just giving a view from where i stand,which is with a hugely powerful,amazing sounding and almost flawless system.Any positive statements or opinions concerning instruments or plugs are as a result of more than a few releases/remixes from which I earn a nice living.Hope this provides food for thought and maybe a bit of reasurance for some.If anyone is interested I may be able to chip in a post relating to CW use in a real setting every couple of weeks.
PS Why use LSD when you can have DSP instesd
